Review of the to-be layer: check what the documents claim against what runs
First pass of a design review, done by reading documents against code and against a raised mesh rather than against each other. Every error below was invisible to a proofread. **Statuses were stale, and nothing checked them.** Ten to-be documents said `designed` while naming working, lab-proven code — several with a *What was built* or *Raised, and observed* section. Added a `status-vs-code` check: naming a file is a claim that the file implements this, so a document that points at one has stopped being merely designed. It failed on all ten before it passed, per the rule this folder sets for its own checks. **The bundle carries three images, not two.** 07 reasoned about which substrate services go in and overlooked that the control plane is in there too — it is what the substrate exists to start, and there is nothing to fetch it with yet. Counted, not deduced. **The bootstrap uses four shapes, not six.** It listed `file` and `directory`, which substrate-first-node.lock never asks for. The claim that mattered — nothing is blocked on the host — was true either way, which is why the wrong count survived. **The eight capabilities were documented nowhere.** Implemented in internal/profile/detectors.go and enumerated in no document, including the one about the host that detects them. A vocabulary modules write against, readable only by reading the code. Now written down, with the seat/graphical-session distinction that is wrong in both directions if collapsed. **MinIO swept out of the to-be layer** per 0028. The gate now fails on one thing left deliberately: ADR 0024 is `proposed` while two documents rest on it and the feature it decides is built and lab-proven. Accepting a decision is not mine to do.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
layer: to-be
|
||||
status: designed
|
||||
status: in-progress
|
||||
code:
|
||||
- mesh-control
|
||||
updated: 2026-08-29
|
||||
updated: 2026-08-31
|
||||
decisions:
|
||||
- 02-DECISIONS/0001-mesh-brokers-nodes-host-agents-think.md
|
||||
- 02-DECISIONS/0005-the-node-host.md
|
||||
@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ volume genuinely argues against a relational store.
|
||||
node except through the host.
|
||||
- **Not a surface.** Tier 3 is how people and agents reach it. It has one interface; the
|
||||
surfaces are what speak to that interface.
|
||||
- **Not the substrate.** It *runs on* tier 1 — PostgreSQL, LavinMQ, MinIO, an OCI registry
|
||||
- **Not the substrate.** It *runs on* tier 1 — PostgreSQL, LavinMQ, an OCI registry
|
||||
([ADR 0006](../../02-DECISIONS/0006-the-substrate-and-the-control-plane.md)) — and cannot start without
|
||||
them, which is what makes them a lower tier.
|
||||
- **Not privileged on a node.** It has no more access to a machine than the declaration
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user